https://npcdaily.com/5798/the-for-the-people-act-is-the-green-new-deal-of-election-reforms/
Found these guys by mistake during a test search totally by accident, they're pretty good.
Found these guys by mistake during a test search totally by accident, they're pretty good.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/old-small-co2-intense-why-canadas-highest-carbon-oil-sites-keep-pumping-2021-06-28/
"Reuters is politically neutral!"
Sure they are.
"Reuters is politically neutral!"
Sure they are.
@FBICatgirl I've been finding them worse in 2021 than in the middle of the first lockdowns in 2020
@Zennblack I don't know if it'll be immediate, but I think a lot of zombies will rot shortly after the lockdowns end too.
@adbenitez Apparently my instance was being used to spam and got banned from matrix.org.
That's when I found out even the big matrix servers don't have administration tools. ejabberd has administration tools...
That's when I found out even the big matrix servers don't have administration tools. ejabberd has administration tools...
@11112011 Growth of the aggregate economy is largely immaterial when all you're doing is trying to make that number rise. The country with the highest average wage on the planet, Luxemburg, also has one of the smallest aggregate economies since only 600,000 people contribute to it. Would they prefer to switch places with china, who has the second largest economy on the planet and a quarter of the average income?
It's a known problem in management, where if you incentivize the growth of one variable you end up with the number you want but you also end up damaging the things that matter. In corporations, we see it where a CEO might get their profit numbers for the quarter at the expense of investments that will be critical to growth after that CEO's tenure ends.
In this case, what really matters is two things: First is productivity per worker. If the productivity rises, then there's justification for higher wages because it remains profitable to employ that worker despite higher costs. Second is the supply and demand of labor. If there's lots of workers then there's no justification to pay workers more because you can just fire the one you have and get someone else off the street.
The sort of growth you're advocating and the methods you're talking about harm both of these. First, the productivity of a third world worker will be less than of a first world worker so productivity per worker drops. Second, the supply of labor rises so even if the first bit is true there's no reason to raise wages because there's plenty of people to hire if the help starts to complain. Therefore, this is a recipe for wages stagnating even in a growing economy.
Finally, you asked about jobs that aren't worth the extra money. Well, under central planning all jobs exist forever, but in free markets if a job isn't justified it stops existing. That's why productivity goes up in free markets and tends to go down under central planning. I don't have any manservants or maids or nannies. I usually don't have anyone filling my car with gas. I don't have someone come and collect my shit and piss to sell to leather makers. These jobs largely don't exist anymore because there's more productive jobs available that will pay more. The people who would have been doing that are doing one of the more productive jobs that result. If the job is profitable, then it'll exist. If it isn't, then those resources will have to go towards something that is. I think you'd be surprised that despite the complaining of corporations who want slave labor, many of these jobs would stay right where they are, but with better pay and working conditions.
It's a known problem in management, where if you incentivize the growth of one variable you end up with the number you want but you also end up damaging the things that matter. In corporations, we see it where a CEO might get their profit numbers for the quarter at the expense of investments that will be critical to growth after that CEO's tenure ends.
In this case, what really matters is two things: First is productivity per worker. If the productivity rises, then there's justification for higher wages because it remains profitable to employ that worker despite higher costs. Second is the supply and demand of labor. If there's lots of workers then there's no justification to pay workers more because you can just fire the one you have and get someone else off the street.
The sort of growth you're advocating and the methods you're talking about harm both of these. First, the productivity of a third world worker will be less than of a first world worker so productivity per worker drops. Second, the supply of labor rises so even if the first bit is true there's no reason to raise wages because there's plenty of people to hire if the help starts to complain. Therefore, this is a recipe for wages stagnating even in a growing economy.
Finally, you asked about jobs that aren't worth the extra money. Well, under central planning all jobs exist forever, but in free markets if a job isn't justified it stops existing. That's why productivity goes up in free markets and tends to go down under central planning. I don't have any manservants or maids or nannies. I usually don't have anyone filling my car with gas. I don't have someone come and collect my shit and piss to sell to leather makers. These jobs largely don't exist anymore because there's more productive jobs available that will pay more. The people who would have been doing that are doing one of the more productive jobs that result. If the job is profitable, then it'll exist. If it isn't, then those resources will have to go towards something that is. I think you'd be surprised that despite the complaining of corporations who want slave labor, many of these jobs would stay right where they are, but with better pay and working conditions.
@11112011 You mean this graph that shows that working class people might actually get some power at the negotiating table for once?
Yeah, that's terrible. We should definitely support importing a bunch of wage slaves so that companies never have to actually compete for labor and improve working standards or wages or reduce the requirements they have from "entry level position: 80 years experience required"
The Japanese are struggling right now due to their demographic situation, but the next step comes soon, and they'll have the highest standard of living in the world whereas the rest of us will be struggling and intentionally destroying a natural cycle of growth and decline will be the reason why.
Then once working conditions improve, there will be better conditions to raise a child under and there will probably be another baby boom and the cycle starts again, whereas we'll be in our third generation of begging our corporate overlords to be kind.
Yeah, that's terrible. We should definitely support importing a bunch of wage slaves so that companies never have to actually compete for labor and improve working standards or wages or reduce the requirements they have from "entry level position: 80 years experience required"
The Japanese are struggling right now due to their demographic situation, but the next step comes soon, and they'll have the highest standard of living in the world whereas the rest of us will be struggling and intentionally destroying a natural cycle of growth and decline will be the reason why.
Then once working conditions improve, there will be better conditions to raise a child under and there will probably be another baby boom and the cycle starts again, whereas we'll be in our third generation of begging our corporate overlords to be kind.
@bigl0af It's almost as if the people decrying censorship warned that it wouldn't stop at the people you don't like.
But I'm sure that never happened.
But I'm sure that never happened.
@jeffcliff @becassine Trump is an impotent paper tiger used by the powers that be to justify fascism.
The powers that be will use whatever they need to in order to take control of our lives. In the past they sponsored wars, today they've lightened their touch and now they use the popular themes of equality and social justice to ensure inequality and injustice.
And we'll cheer. Because we're stupid.
[User was disappeared by the CRTC gestapo for this post]
The powers that be will use whatever they need to in order to take control of our lives. In the past they sponsored wars, today they've lightened their touch and now they use the popular themes of equality and social justice to ensure inequality and injustice.
And we'll cheer. Because we're stupid.
[User was disappeared by the CRTC gestapo for this post]
@fluffy Anyone keeping their savings in a savings account doesn't know how money works.
Savings accounts haven't been a reasonable place to keep your money for decades. You've always needed to keep your savings in low-risk investments just to match inflation. If your money isn't growing to match inflation then you've already been paying an average of 2% per year to store your money.
Cypto *can* be part of an overall strategy, but it's a very high risk part. On any given day it could double or half based on basically nothing. You'd want to have a balanced and diversified portfolio of investments from low risk to high risk to make sure that no matter what happens you achieve growth. As high risk assets grow you'd also want to periodically rebalance so your wealth is protected as your high risk investments grow.
Savings accounts haven't been a reasonable place to keep your money for decades. You've always needed to keep your savings in low-risk investments just to match inflation. If your money isn't growing to match inflation then you've already been paying an average of 2% per year to store your money.
Cypto *can* be part of an overall strategy, but it's a very high risk part. On any given day it could double or half based on basically nothing. You'd want to have a balanced and diversified portfolio of investments from low risk to high risk to make sure that no matter what happens you achieve growth. As high risk assets grow you'd also want to periodically rebalance so your wealth is protected as your high risk investments grow.
@Donald_McRonald @hourmutt Sure at first, but once we make it past the revolution things will be virtually violence free. If you want to prevent the most violence, then overwhelming authoritarian force will ultimately result in the lest violence since you'll prevent much more violence than you use.